Michigan Decision Letter for State Accountability Plans under the Consolidated State Application Process
July 2, 2010
The Honorable Michael P. Flanagan
Superintendent of Public Instruction
Michigan Department of Education
608 W. Allegan Street
Lansing, Michigan 48909
Dear Superintendent Flanagan:
I am writing in response to Michigan’s request to amend its state accountability plan under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). Following discussions between the Department and your staff, you made certain changes to Michigan’s accountability plan, which are now included in the amended plan that Michigan submitted to the Department on June 28, 2010. I am pleased to approve Michigan’s amended plan, which we will post on the Department’s website. A summary of Michigan’s requested amendments is enclosed with this letter. As you know, any further requests to amend Michigan’s accountability plan must be submitted to the Department for review and approval as required by section 1111(f)(2) of Title I of the ESEA. Please also be aware that approval of Michigan’s accountability plan for Title I, including the amendments approved herein, does not indicate that the plan complies with Federal civil rights requirements, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and requirements under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
I am confident that Michigan will continue to advance its efforts to hold schools and school districts accountable for the achievement of all students. If you need any additional assistance to implement the standards, assessment, and accountability provisions of the ESEA, please do not hesitate to contact (Vicki.Robinson@ed.gov) or (David.Harmon@ed.gov) of my staff.
Thelma Meléndez de Santa Ana, Ph.D.
cc: Governor Jennifer Granholm
Amendments to Michigan’s Accountability Plan
The following is a summary of Michigan’s amendment requests. Please refer to the Department’s website (www.ed.govhttps://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/stateplans03/index.html) for Michigan’s complete accountability plan.
The following amendments are aligned with the statute and regulations. Including every public school and local educational agency (LEA) in the State Accountability System (Element 1.1)
Revision: Michigan will attribute student scores to the LEA and school of residence starting in the 2010-2011 school year based on assessments administered during the 2010-2011 school year. This policy will be uniform across the state and will apply to a Shared Education Entity with a signed agreement with participating school districts. This will not apply to a center that educates only from within its own district. All student scores from regional centers will be treated in the same way. This change will apply to regional centers including centers that provide special education programs, alternative education programs, and programs for gifted students. This policy will not apply to students who attend an LEA other than the LEA of residence under Michigan’s schools-of-choice policies.
Including all students in the State Accountability System (Element 2.1)
Revision: Beginning in the 2009–2010 school year, for purposes of determining the proficiency rate on the State’s assessments for use in AYP determinations, Michigan will treat a student who engages in certain prohibited behavior as “tested – not proficient.” Cases of misadministration will continue to be treated as “not tested” for the purpose of the participation rate to be used in AYP determinations.
Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs) for determining AYP (Element 3.2b)
Revision: Michigan adjusted its AMOs for English/language arts to AMOs for reading. Michigan plans to use the reading assessments for AYP, beginning in school year 2009-2010.
The following chart shows the new AMOs for reading:
2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-1 2013-14 Elementary 69% 77% 85% 92% 100% Middle 66% 74% 82% 91% 100% High 71% 79% 86% 93% 100%
Including all the required student subgroups in AYP definition (Element 5.1)
Revision: Michigan will use the following major racial and ethnic subgroups for data collection and the calculation of AYP: American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian American including Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, Black or African American, White, Hispanic or Latino, and Multiracial.
Including students with disabilities in adequate yearly progress (AYP) (Element 5.3)
Revision: Michigan will use the scores from the 2009-2010 administration of the MEAP-Access, its alternate assessment based on modified academic achievement standards, as part of AYP determinations for school year 2009-2010.